Funniest in-joke was Jeffrey Combs playing both Weyoun and Brunt in the same episode of DS9 ("The Dogs of War").
I thought they said the JJ-comics were canon?
- Thread starter JackSparrowJive
- Start date
^Well, I'm sure they shot the Brunt scenes and the Weyoun scenes on different days. So it would've been the same as any other guest shoot, getting the makeup put on every morning and removed every night, except that the makeup changed halfway through the week.
Wasn't Bashir originally older, as well. Then they changed the character because they liked Siddig?I remember the original Voyager "Bible." Tuvok was an elderly Vulcan who was a mentor to B'Elanna. The EMH was named "Doc Zimmerman." And we weren't allowed to mention what kind of animal Chakotay's spirit guide was because that hadn't been decided yet.
Clearly, everything was set in stone from Day One.
Similarly, the original DS9 "Bible" contained no mention of the Dominion, Founders, Changelings, Vortas, pagh-wraiths, Jem Hadar, or any hint of Odo's origins. All of that came later.
I don't know about that, just that he was going to be named Julian Amoros instead. Maybe what you're thinking of is that they initially wanted Siddig for Sisko because of the commanding power he conveyed in a certain role, then were surprised when they found out he was much younger than they thought, too young to be the father of a teenager.
Personally, I find Hertzler has a very distinctive voice, which made it clear he was the Vulcan captain in Emissary.
Lt. Cheka Wey
Commander
Amoros. Seriously that would had been cheesy even in Esmeralda.
True (much like Armin Shimerman does) - but if you never went to go back and rewatch "Emissary" after Martok shows up, you're not likely to twig onto his having been on the show four years earlier.
Shoot, I thought they were canon too. I thought that was the point of the new comics being done by JJ's people. Oh well.....I enjoy the books and they are not canon. BTW I am working on my first story. Just for fun. It's not canon either, but it has been fun writing it.
The point was to keep them as consistent with canon as they could, which isn't the same thing as actually being part of the canon. But I think Bad Robot underestimated how difficult it would be to keep the tie-ins consistent with an ongoing canon. There's a reason the only really canonical novels and tie-ins (like the Del Rey Babylon 5 novels or the Buffy "Season 8/9" comics) are those that come along after the screen series has ended. Ultimately, tie-ins are always secondary to the core work and must yield to it, unless the core work ends.
Lt. Cheka Wey
Commander
It's pretty easy. Teh universe is a bigplace, too bad does not have 25000 years to play with ike SW. 30000 if you include the Rakata.
Having to defer to a central authority on which fiction is "real" and which is the "fake fiction" is beyond silly.
It's only silly because there is no such "central authority" in the first place. No studio is going to pay someone a salary to sit around and issue instructions to the general public about what they're allowed to like. That's a complete myth and a complete misunderstanding. Canon is not a command or a policy or a regulation. It's just a description. The creators of a fictional franchise create their work, and that is something we call the canon. And no, that does not mean "real." Canons contradict and rewrite their own pasts all the time, because it's not real and thus can be changed and rethought and improved.
And no, canon absolutely is not something that tells audiences they should only like some things and not others. Where's the percentage in telling your audience not to buy books or comics that would put more money in your coffers? The only people who use "canon" as a standard of what's admissible to enjoy are fans who impose that standard on themselves, and delude themselves into thinking they're being instructed by some higher authority.
The reason that tie-ins aren't binding on canon isn't a matter of some "central authority" handing down ukases. It's simply a matter of practicality. Like I said above, no matter how hard you try to keep tie-ins consistent with an ongoing canon, a work of fiction is just too much of a moving target, evolving in unpredictable ways. So there has to be a core work that sets the pace and secondary works that follow its lead and risk being left behind when it veers in an unexpected direction. It's just the nature of the beast. It's not something that's dictated by some imaginary studio department or government agency or whatever; it's just the way the process happens.
Last edited:
But the reverse is also silly. Imagine telling a Hollywood screenwriter that his new movie script can't be used because its whole premise was invalidated by a few panels in a tie-in comic that was seen by less than 1% of the viewing audience and has been out of print since 1972.
Lt. Cheka Wey
Commander
or an episde of an obscure TNG episode. I am pretty sure that happened in Trek.
But the reverse is also silly. Imagine telling a Hollywood screenwriter that his new movie script can't be used because its whole premise was invalidated by a few panels in a tie-in comic that was seen by less than 1% of the viewing audience and has been out of print since 1972.
Bingo. That's the whole thing in a nutshell. As I've written before, this isn't a philosophical or artistic choice; it's a simple matter of practicality. No one in their right mind is going to let a movie or TV episode intended for millions of viewers be affected by something that was written in an old Greg Cox novel fifteen years ago . . .
But you know as well as anyone that there are a chunk of fans who enjoy a work of fiction set in the Star Trek universe less if it isn't authoritatively declared "canon." There are fans who, for some reason, need that distinction made by an outside arbiter. My point is that that's silly.
But the reverse is also silly. Imagine telling a Hollywood screenwriter that his new movie script can't be used because its whole premise was invalidated by a few panels in a tie-in comic that was seen by less than 1% of the viewing audience and has been out of print since 1972.
Bingo. That's the whole thing in a nutshell. As I've written before, this isn't a philosophical or artistic choice; it's a simple matter of practicality. No one in their right mind is going to let a movie or TV episode intended for millions of viewers be affected by something that was written in an old Greg Cox novel fifteen years ago . . .
As Christopher said:
^Exactly. They believe in an "outside arbiter" that doesn't exist. It's not a matter of arbitration, just definition. Canon isn't a value judgment, it's just a thing that exists.
The silly part is when fans complain about this nonexistent central authority imposing restrictions on their enjoyment. They don't realize that the only people imposing restrictions are themselves.
The silly part is when fans complain about this nonexistent central authority imposing restrictions on their enjoyment. They don't realize that the only people imposing restrictions are themselves.
Well so far they've done a decent job of it seeing as the only major contradictions are a few lines of dialogue.
Thats pretty much the level of effort into continuity most long running tv shows manage. Not to mention film series, book series, and ect.
Given how much information in both film and comics is conveyed exclusively through dialogue, what would you consider to be a more major contradiction?
Similar threads
